Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
341 to 360 of 95957 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The High Court addressed the validity of an assessment u/s 153A and the jurisdiction for assessment proceedings transfer. The petitioner challenged the transfer from Sangli to Kozhikode, citing lack of mandatory notice and hearing u/s 127(2) and absence of a Document Identification Number (DIN) in the order. The Court found that notice was duly served, giving the petitioner an opportunity to respond, which was not utilized. The absence of DIN is being considered by the Supreme Court, but the transfer was deemed valid as the petitioner's business and recovery were within Kozhikode's jurisdiction. The Court dismissed the writ petition, finding no errors in the proceedings.
The High Court addressed the validity of an assessment u/s 153A and the jurisdiction for assessment proceedings transfer. The petitioner challenged the transfer from Sangli to Kozhikode, citing lack of mandatory notice and hearing u/s 127(2) and absence of a Document Identification Number (DIN) in the order. The Court found that notice was duly served, giving the petitioner an opportunity to respond, which was not utilized. The absence of DIN is being considered by the Supreme Court, but the transfer was deemed valid as the petitioner's business and recovery were within Kozhikode's jurisdiction. The Court dismissed the writ petition, finding no errors in the proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
